Dimensions, by Alice Munro

Yes, so in my continued attempts to understand my world a little better, to have a wider perspective, to generally approach what could be said to be a more... cultured perspective, I bought a copy of The Best American Short Stories. 2007. You know, the one with Stephen King's name on it.

I had a $25 gift card for the book store and I drove my daughter to exasperation looking for a second book until I settled on an Alice Munro collection, The Love of a Good Woman. I've come across several comments to the effect that Munro is our greatest living short story writer. Ok, says I, so why is her verbiage so very wonderful?

Reading the first story in the Best book, I am struck by several thoughts. First, the story is almost exclusively TELLING. It is a first person narrative, which I guess is inherently 'telling' to a degree, but it still baffles me a bit. In all the advice, crits, words of wisdom, that bombards young (hey, I'm still pretty young!) writers, this is the foremost tenet after 'omit needless words': show don't tell.

HHHmmmm.

The next thing I notice about the story, Called 'Pa's Darling' by Louis Auchincloss, is that it takes place... Well, it is a recounting of events taking place... in a segment of society so removed from the average person's experience that it might as well be speculative. Vacations in the Hamptons and such. It was published originally in the Yale Review, so for that audience the setting and characters may be common. I don't mention this to imply that there is something inherently wrong with a story about wealthy characters, but I do wonder, one story into the Best, if the stories deemed best are the ones that people who vacation in the Hamptons deem to be.

All that said, I find myself thinking of the story in the days after reading it. The main character seems able to find fault in everyone around her: father, mother, their friends, her husbands. It seems to me that she acted in a calculated and shallow way through her entire life. I felt frustrated at the end, with what seemed like shirking of her personal responsibility for her life in lieu of blaming her father and framing the events, actions, and intents of his life as centered around her.

So, despite my consternation, Auchincloss did something right to get in the book and to give little me so much to chew over. Her writing was lucid, clean, and conveyed the voice of her character expertly.

There is one Fantasy & Science Fiction story in the book. Of course after reading the intro story I skipped ahead to see what lofty tale had been selected by King to REPRESENT! for us in the genre ghettos. Bruce McCallister, and his 'The Boy from Zaquitos'.

The story is well written, compelling: a story of the 'show don't tell' school despite being a lecture given by the narrator. I liked it: it seemed a solid story with real insights into its main character and commentary on uses and abuses of power and the value of human life. Or maybe just one life. I dig it. My only criticism is of the editorial choice of a mundane SF story when I have no doubt that we could rummage up a full-octane tale of SF, Fantasy, or Horror comparable in quality. People who object to GENRE fiction (presumably becuase it is about 'stuff that can't really happen') need to go read them some Kafka and Marquez and Borges and then come back and tell me these works belong in the gutter too. Didn't think so.

McCallister's story is great: don't mistake what I'm saying.

But I wanted to tell you about this story, 'Dimensions', by Alice Munro.

Best story in the book so far. I've read a bit about Munro, wanting to get a feel for what she writes. Noted is that she tends to focus less on story than on characters reaching an epiphany or moment of understanding. That said, I thought she did a good job in this story of, well, telling a story, but in the most glorious SHOWING way. Her style is not quite invisible, but close. Her main character is self aware enough to realize that others will understand her contrary to her own assessments, but limited enough to inadvertantly reveal herself. She does this both with the reader and two other characters.

It is this character's growth through the story's central tragedy that makes this story special. Munro does not over-explain, but relates these experiences clearly enough that there is no question for the reader what has happened. But what does it mean to the character? That, I think, is an interesting discussion, and I hope I run into someone who has read this story. I am partial to stories about redemption and for me that is what this story was about: taking the pieces of what one has left and making something of it that hints at happiness. And there is an honesty to the 'answer' the main character finds at the story conclusion. It contains parts, good parts, from the one who destroyed her world. She accepts that. It's a nice sequence in a nice story.

I feel reassured by Munro's story. It seems that telling stories of the 'show don't tell' school remains a well-regarded methodology. Good writing can be about people who work at the Comfort Inn as a maid, and it can even include elements like murder and speculations of crazy men. Sounds like a SciFi story, right? Nope, but it is good.
____________

I got my copy of Lady Churchill's Rosebud Wristlet (#23) in the mail today. Can't wait to read it! I should have a copy of The Willows soon, as well as the hardcopy of M-BRANE SF #1 featuring yours truly. More to come! Take care. bb